The following editorial is reprinted from JUST CAUSE #17, the quarterly newsletter of Citi

The following editorial is reprinted from JUST CAUSE #17, the quarterly
newsletter of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy.
At a time when public awareness of the UFO phenomenon is at a
very high level, we note a disturbing situation. Serious
controversy has developed in connection with the Gulf Breeze,
Florida UFO photo case, a controversy which threatens the
integrity of our subject (see recent issues of the MUFON UFO
Journal and CUFOS Bulletin for details.)
One may debate the merits or demerits of a sighting, this is
what investigation and discussion of casework is all about. What
has clearly developed here however is an exercise in character
assassination, with MUFON and Gulf Breeze supporters on one side
and CUFOS and Gulf Breeze critics on the other side.
Unfortunately the verbal muggings going on and their aftermath
will hurt us all. UFO study will continue to be perceived as a
fragmented, disorganized political boxing ring where those of
differing opinions slug it out to see who can blacken the
other's eyes.
Our position is that the burden of proof is on the Gulf Breeze
supporters to prove their case, something we feel has not been
done yet at this writing (8/23). It is entirely reasonable and
necessary to raise critical questions and put a case through a
ringer of tough scrutiny before it deserves the label "UFO." The
questions posed by the Center for UFO Studies are serious,
legitimate, and have not been adequately answered by the MUFON
side of the fence. We are most dismayed at the removal of Robert
Boyd, MUFON's State Director for Alabama and a former
investigator and current critic of Gulf Breeze, from his
directorship by MUFON's International Director, Walt Andrus. The
reason given, alleged violations of MUFON's Field Manual, will
undoubtedly be interpreted instead as retaliation for being
vocally against what MUFON has now endorsed as authentic (see
MUFON UFO Journal, August 1988). At the same time we've noted
statements earlier in the year by Gulf Breeze proponents which
were outrageously biased, yet no punishment seems to have been
meted out at all.
The consequences of the current debate are clear. If an
organization makes a policy decision to support a bizarre
incident, or series of incidents, as authentic and then proceeds
to attack all criticism, every question MUST be answered, not
ignored; otherwise, the organization's support must be
considered "lightweight" and without firm scientific foundation.
The organization then becomes vulnerable to credibility
questions and its hard-earned influence fades quickly into
obscurity.
We would like to see total and amiable cooperation between all
organizations researching UFOs. It is obvious though that with
four decades of experience behind us this will be nearly
impossible. We can only hope that UFOs will be explained
ultimately, despite the petty bickerings of those who embrace
the subject the most.
We support a recent statement by CUFOS, The CUFOS Position on
the Gulf Breeze Case [CUFOS.GB] and look for a quick
resolution to this very serious problem.